GAME OVER: BLUE vs. RED

[Long Con]

Whose idea was this?

Instant blame. New top suspect.

It'd be sweet if you used your head instead of your pooping ass to play Mafia. What in the world kind of shit would my end of game play be as a Mafia player?

If I am a Mafia player, the only possible justification for what I did was to save Notsawyer. Otherwise I as a Mafia player just stay away from the thread for the last 20 minutes.

Seriously mate you havin a fucken lend or whaT?

Having a lend? Sorry Mac, I'm not hip to that slang.

So what you're saying here is that your actions so today should convince us all that you are Civ. And you can't think of a reason why a baddie would do what you did. You can't think of a reason why a baddie would vote for and secure the lynch of a Civ in a way that he can instantly argue a baddie wouldn't do.

[Marmot]

And MM evidently suspects both LC and thellama73.

What's your point?

[MacDougall]

Whose idea was this?

Instant blame. New top suspect.

It'd be sweet if you used your head instead of your pooping ass to play Mafia. What in the world kind of shit would my end of game play be as a Mafia player?

If I am a Mafia player, the only possible justification for what I did was to save Notsawyer. Otherwise I as a Mafia player just stay away from the thread for the last 20 minutes.

Seriously mate you havin a fucken lend or whaT?

Having a lend? Sorry Mac, I'm not hip to that slang.

So what you're saying here is that your actions so today should convince us all that you are Civ. And you can't think of a reason why a baddie would do what you did. You can't think of a reason why a baddie would vote for and secure the lynch of a Civ in a way that he can instantly argue a baddie wouldn't do.

No what I am saying is that I didn't do it and it should be quite obvious.

[Long Con]

But you see my point.

[Epignosis]

Whose idea was this?

Instant blame. New top suspect.

It'd be sweet if you used your head instead of your pooping ass to play Mafia. What in the world kind of shit would my end of game play be as a Mafia player?

If I am a Mafia player, the only possible justification for what I did was to save Notsawyer. Otherwise I as a Mafia player just stay away from the thread for the last 20 minutes.

Seriously mate you havin a fucken lend or whaT?

Holding out hope for Faraday, Floyd, or Mac. Whichever one saves me will gain major civ points in my book.

Marmot's vote won't be enough to save me even if he changes to Quin

Nope. No possible justification to get involved at all.

[Epignosis]

And MM evidently suspects both LC and thellama73.

What's your point?

You suspect two people I now have a reason to believe are good, and you tried to get me to vote for thellama73 but you only offered "Fair enough" when I said I suspected him but wouldn't vote for him- you didn't make any kind of effort to make that lynch happen (or the lynch of LC for that matter). That makes me suspect you more.

[thellama73]

Sawyer, are you still maintaining your innocence in the wake of that fiasco?

[Epignosis]

Sawyer, are you still maintaining your innocence in the wake of that fiasco?

How does the fiasco make him guilty? Break it down for me.

[thellama73]

Sawyer, are you still maintaining your innocence in the wake of that fiasco?

How does the fiasco make him guilty? Break it down for me.

The fiasco doesn't make him guilty, the role given to him by G-Man makes him guilty. His behavior reveals his guilt. And the fiasco teaches me to trust my own instincts and not go along with the cool kids.

[Long Con]

Sawyer, are you still maintaining your innocence in the wake of that fiasco?

How does the fiasco make him guilty? Break it down for me.

The fiasco doesn't make him guilty, the role given to him by G-Man makes him guilty. His behavior reveals his guilt. And the fiasco teaches me to trust my own instincts and not go along with the cool kids.

Maybe it would be better if you were less pedantic about it, and read Epi's question the way you know he intended it - "How does the fiasco behaviour reveal his guilt?" or something like that.

[Epignosis]

Sawyer, are you still maintaining your innocence in the wake of that fiasco?

How does the fiasco make him guilty? Break it down for me.

The fiasco doesn't make him guilty, the role given to him by G-Man makes him guilty. His behavior reveals his guilt. And the fiasco teaches me to trust my own instincts and not go along with the cool kids.

"The wake of that fiasco" doesn't have anything to do with the role G-Man gave him either.

You are now citing his behavior that reveals his guilt. Walk me through what he said and did that is so revealing.

[thellama73]

Sawyer, are you still maintaining your innocence in the wake of that fiasco?

How does the fiasco make him guilty? Break it down for me.

The fiasco doesn't make him guilty, the role given to him by G-Man makes him guilty. His behavior reveals his guilt. And the fiasco teaches me to trust my own instincts and not go along with the cool kids.

Maybe it would be better if you were less pedantic about it, and read Epi's question the way you know he intended it - "How does the fiasco behaviour reveal his guilt?" or something like that.

I've made my case on him a bunch of times. The only thing that has changed is that a whole host of people rushed in to rescue him at the last minute. That looks suspicious because people with teammates are more likely to be saved at the last minute than people without teammates, but mainly I just stand by my original case. I am annoyed that I allowed myself to be dissuaded from voting for my first choice by groupthink. As a wise man once said, "none of us is as dumb as all of us."

[thellama73]

Sawyer, are you still maintaining your innocence in the wake of that fiasco?

How does the fiasco make him guilty? Break it down for me.

The fiasco doesn't make him guilty, the role given to him by G-Man makes him guilty. His behavior reveals his guilt. And the fiasco teaches me to trust my own instincts and not go along with the cool kids.

"The wake of that fiasco" doesn't have anything to do with the role G-Man gave him either.

You are now citing his behavior that reveals his guilt. Walk me through what he said and did that is so revealing.

Epi, I get that you think Sawyer is a civ. I think you are wrong. I'm tired right now, but if you really don't remember/don't want to look for it, I will dig up my explanation of why I think Sawyer is bad first thing in the morning for you, okay?

[Epignosis]

Sawyer, are you still maintaining your innocence in the wake of that fiasco?

How does the fiasco make him guilty? Break it down for me.

The fiasco doesn't make him guilty, the role given to him by G-Man makes him guilty. His behavior reveals his guilt. And the fiasco teaches me to trust my own instincts and not go along with the cool kids.

Maybe it would be better if you were less pedantic about it, and read Epi's question the way you know he intended it - "How does the fiasco behaviour reveal his guilt?" or something like that.

I've made my case on him a bunch of times. The only thing that has changed is that a whole host of people rushed in to rescue him at the last minute. That looks suspicious because people with teammates are more likely to be saved at the last minute than people without teammates, but mainly I just stand by my original case. I am annoyed that I allowed myself to be dissuaded from voting for my first choice by groupthink. As a wise man once said, "none of us is as dumb as all of us."

Your "case" was this: "I think Sawyer has looked bad from Day 1. His equivocating, his dismissiveness, and his case on you seems forced. He is getting my vote today."

I asked you to elaborate to on his equivocation and you referenced stuff from Day 0 / Day 1:

Llama, you used a curious word in describing notsawyer: "Equivocating." How does this adjective apply to notsawyer? "Resolute" or "stubborn" is the word I would have used.

I'll have to dig up my original post where I accused him of that when I'm feeling less sick/tired than I am now, but briefly he spent part of Day0/1 saying things like "On the one hand... on the other hand... but I'm not sure... or it COULD be..." which I regard as a baddie tell. Baddies tend to be noncommittal (moreso than civvies) because committing to a viewpoint leaves you vulnerable when you are proven wrong (as baddies must eventually be). Granted he's being a lot less noncommittal in his case on you, biut only after I called him out.

Then:

And, both. This is civilian Quin though. I'd be unanimously town-read if I was bad.

Oh wait a minute! Just when I was about ready to plant Quin firmly in my Civ column, he lets loose with this howler.

"I'm playing exactly like a civvie. Nothing I'm doing indicates in the slightest that I am bad." The universal emotions of a frustrated baddie who feels he's played a great game but is losing anyway (I've been there many times.)

I really, really distrust this post.

That isn't equivocation at all. That's a firm claim that you mark as being the sign of not just mafia, but frustrated mafia.

Quin missed my original point and misinterpreted my question. Hence we are talking in circles.

Placeholder vote on Quin. I don't think my original point was that obscure.

You had the chance to reiterate your point. Why didn't you take it, and instead choose to believe that I'm (assumedly purposefully) misinterpreting your question?

Quin, aren't you known for having several page long arguments over nuances of language aka talking in circles?

I don't fault S-V-S for this at all. That said, I don't think it's necessarily a scumtell for you so.

And that's all I have to say about that.

While we're on the subject of Quin, who wants to talk about this doozy of a post from jack?

He acknowledges the case on Quin, but equivocates nicely.


Linki: I voted LC because he was rude to Floyd, so just a placeholder really.

That is well observed. That first sentence is definitely something I could see a teammate writing.

Now you're lynching Quin because someone else- a mafia member- made an equivocating statement about him.

++++

So forgive me if I don't put any stock in your so-called "cases."

[Epignosis]

Sawyer, are you still maintaining your innocence in the wake of that fiasco?

How does the fiasco make him guilty? Break it down for me.

The fiasco doesn't make him guilty, the role given to him by G-Man makes him guilty. His behavior reveals his guilt. And the fiasco teaches me to trust my own instincts and not go along with the cool kids.

"The wake of that fiasco" doesn't have anything to do with the role G-Man gave him either.

You are now citing his behavior that reveals his guilt. Walk me through what he said and did that is so revealing.

Epi, I get that you think Sawyer is a civ. I think you are wrong. I'm tired right now, but if you really don't remember/don't want to look for it, I will dig up my explanation of why I think Sawyer is bad first thing in the morning for you, okay?

No need. I've already found it and dismantled it.

[Long Con]

Sawyer, are you still maintaining your innocence in the wake of that fiasco?

How does the fiasco make him guilty? Break it down for me.

The fiasco doesn't make him guilty, the role given to him by G-Man makes him guilty. His behavior reveals his guilt. And the fiasco teaches me to trust my own instincts and not go along with the cool kids.

"The wake of that fiasco" doesn't have anything to do with the role G-Man gave him either.

You are now citing his behavior that reveals his guilt. Walk me through what he said and did that is so revealing.

Epi, I get that you think Sawyer is a civ. I think you are wrong. I'm tired right now, but if you really don't remember/don't want to look for it, I will dig up my explanation of why I think Sawyer is bad first thing in the morning for you, okay?

No need. I've already found it and dismantled it.

Close call.

[Epignosis]

notsawyer, you're on your own tomorrow. If the field wants you out, I am not going to sit here and defend you further.

Kind of funny how the guy you stubbornly tried to get lynched became your greatest defender.

I plan to spend my time left alive here figuring out who is bad. MM, MacDougall, and Wilgy are my top three suspects off the bat.

[notsawyer540]

RIP Quin.

I'm more inclined to think that Mac is innocent after the way that things went down, because he could've done nothing and sat back and let me get lynched if he were bad. He was the last person to vote and he cast the deciding vote between two civs who were up for lynch. If he were bad, it wouldn't matter to him which one of us got lynched and he only exposed himself to more risk by stepping in. He was my top scum read before, but now I'm not so sure.

One vote that sticks out like a sore thumb is Marmot. Two civs were up for lynch and he avoided voting for either one of them.

[Epignosis]

RIP Quin.

I'm more inclined to think that Mac is innocent after the way that things went down, because he could've done nothing and sat back and let me get lynched if he were bad. He was the last person to vote and he cast the deciding vote between two civs who were up for lynch. If he were bad, it wouldn't matter to him which one of us got lynched and he only exposed himself to more risk by stepping in. He was my top scum read before, but now I'm not so sure.

One vote that sticks out like a sore thumb is Marmot. Two civs were up for lynch and he avoided voting for either one of them.

I am the only person in 2017 to win as mafia on The Syndicate this year.

What you are describing is precisely what I did to win.

[notsawyer540]

RIP Quin.

I'm more inclined to think that Mac is innocent after the way that things went down, because he could've done nothing and sat back and let me get lynched if he were bad. He was the last person to vote and he cast the deciding vote between two civs who were up for lynch. If he were bad, it wouldn't matter to him which one of us got lynched and he only exposed himself to more risk by stepping in. He was my top scum read before, but now I'm not so sure.

One vote that sticks out like a sore thumb is Marmot. Two civs were up for lynch and he avoided voting for either one of them.

I am the only person in 2017 to win as mafia on The Syndicate this year.

What you are describing is precisely what I did to win.

What game was that?

[Epignosis]

RIP Quin.

I'm more inclined to think that Mac is innocent after the way that things went down, because he could've done nothing and sat back and let me get lynched if he were bad. He was the last person to vote and he cast the deciding vote between two civs who were up for lynch. If he were bad, it wouldn't matter to him which one of us got lynched and he only exposed himself to more risk by stepping in. He was my top scum read before, but now I'm not so sure.

One vote that sticks out like a sore thumb is Marmot. Two civs were up for lynch and he avoided voting for either one of them.

I am the only person in 2017 to win as mafia on The Syndicate this year.

What you are describing is precisely what I did to win.

What game was that?

Good luck reading it.

[notsawyer540]

Good luck reading it.

lol that's an interesting concept for a game.

[Marmot]

And MM evidently suspects both LC and thellama73.

What's your point?

You suspect two people I now have a reason to believe are good, and you tried to get me to vote for thellama73 but you only offered "Fair enough" when I said I suspected him but wouldn't vote for him- you didn't make any kind of effort to make that lynch happen (or the lynch of LC for that matter). That makes me suspect you more.

1) I wasn't around after that point, so I was incapable of doing anything.

2) I'm not going to launch a campaign against every person I suspect, that's too much work, and likely wouldn't be fruitful anyway.

3) You suspect him but aren't pushing for his lynch either. Why do you suspect me for doing the same thing?

[MacDougall]

RIP Quin.

I'm more inclined to think that Mac is innocent after the way that things went down, because he could've done nothing and sat back and let me get lynched if he were bad. He was the last person to vote and he cast the deciding vote between two civs who were up for lynch. If he were bad, it wouldn't matter to him which one of us got lynched and he only exposed himself to more risk by stepping in. He was my top scum read before, but now I'm not so sure.

One vote that sticks out like a sore thumb is Marmot. Two civs were up for lynch and he avoided voting for either one of them.

I am the only person in 2017 to win as mafia on The Syndicate this year.

What you are describing is precisely what I did to win.

I wish I was that cool.

[Epignosis]

And MM evidently suspects both LC and thellama73.

What's your point?

You suspect two people I now have a reason to believe are good, and you tried to get me to vote for thellama73 but you only offered "Fair enough" when I said I suspected him but wouldn't vote for him- you didn't make any kind of effort to make that lynch happen (or the lynch of LC for that matter). That makes me suspect you more.

1) I wasn't around after that point, so I was incapable of doing anything.

2) I'm not going to launch a campaign against every person I suspect, that's too much work, and likely wouldn't be fruitful anyway.

3) You suspect him but aren't pushing for his lynch either. Why do you suspect me for doing the same thing?

I did suspect him. The LC comment was always in the back of my mind. What do you make of his appraisal?

[Long Con]

And MM evidently suspects both LC and thellama73.

What's your point?

You suspect two people I now have a reason to believe are good, and you tried to get me to vote for thellama73 but you only offered "Fair enough" when I said I suspected him but wouldn't vote for him- you didn't make any kind of effort to make that lynch happen (or the lynch of LC for that matter). That makes me suspect you more.

1) I wasn't around after that point, so I was incapable of doing anything.

2) I'm not going to launch a campaign against every person I suspect, that's too much work, and likely wouldn't be fruitful anyway.

3) You suspect him but aren't pushing for his lynch either. Why do you suspect me for doing the same thing?

I did suspect him. The LC comment was always in the back of my mind. What do you make of his appraisal?

Ok, well, that comment, and his placement in my rainbow list, was entirely fabricated. I wanted to make it look like I Lie Detected him, but I didn't. I can't Lie Detect. It was a ruse.

He's a very valid suspect.

[Long Con]

Also: please don't be mad.

[Long Con]

At the very least, Metalmarsh and Epi's Llama-based reactions should be analyzable, from the perspective that they thought Llama was Civ-cleared? I don't know, that's one perspective.

[Epignosis]

Also: please don't be mad.

I'm not. Temporarily annoyed would be a better description.

At the very least, Metalmarsh and Epi's Llama-based reactions should be analyzable, from the perspective that they thought Llama was Civ-cleared? I don't know, that's one perspective.

My appraisal of you was tied to llama. My view was that if one of you was bad, so too was the other.

I'm okay putting you both back in the suspect pool, however.

I just don't know what you think you accomplished if you are a civilian.

I have wanted to string llama up for the way he's been characterizing people and acting like Day 0 stuff is more important than Day 3 stuff. You single-highhandedly prevented me from pursuing that avenue, so if you are a civilian, thanks for nothing.

[Marmot]

At the very least, Metalmarsh and Epi's Llama-based reactions should be analyzable, from the perspective that they thought Llama was Civ-cleared? I don't know, that's one perspective.

When did I say llama was civ-cleared?

[Marmot]

I did suspect him. The LC comment was always in the back of my mind. What do you make of his appraisal?

I think it was a lie.

[Epignosis]

Yeah, I'm good lynching MM.

[Long Con]

At the very least, Metalmarsh and Epi's Llama-based reactions should be analyzable, from the perspective that they thought Llama was Civ-cleared? I don't know, that's one perspective.

When did I say llama was civ-cleared?

You didn't say it. It was generally assumed based on my list and comments.

@Epi: I am actually preparing a nice ISO on MM that should be quite convincing that he is bad.

[Epignosis]

What is your actual opinion on llama? I think he stinks.

[Long Con]

What is your actual opinion on llama? I think he stinks.

I voted for him the first two days, and I haven't really changed my opinion. What were his opinions on Quin during his lynch?

[Epignosis]

What is your actual opinion on llama? I think he stinks.

I voted for him the first two days, and I haven't really changed my opinion. What were his opinions on Quin during his lynch?

I'd have to look.

You do understand that I now suspect you as well. Yes, I'm sure you do.

[Marmot]

At the very least, Metalmarsh and Epi's Llama-based reactions should be analyzable, from the perspective that they thought Llama was Civ-cleared? I don't know, that's one perspective.

When did I say llama was civ-cleared?

You didn't say it. It was generally assumed based on my list and comments.

@Epi: I am actually preparing a nice ISO on MM that should be quite convincing that he is bad.

I'd love to see it.

[Long Con]

What is your actual opinion on llama? I think he stinks.

I voted for him the first two days, and I haven't really changed my opinion. What were his opinions on Quin during his lynch?

I'd have to look.

You do understand that I now suspect you as well. Yes, I'm sure you do.

It's fine. I probably have an inflated sense of my own lynch-survivability, which makes things easier for me.

[Marmot]

What is your actual opinion on llama? I think he stinks.

I voted for him the first two days, and I haven't really changed my opinion. What were his opinions on Quin during his lynch?

I'd have to look.

You do understand that I now suspect you as well. Yes, I'm sure you do.

It's fine. I probably have an inflated sense of my own lynch-survivability, which makes things easier for me.

You've got your mafia games all mixed up.

[thellama73]

So forgive me if I don't put any stock in your so-called "cases."

You're forgiven. I hope you'll extend me the same courtesy and forgive me for not putting much stock in your reads, given that they have cost us SVS and Quin.

[MacDougall]

I got Llama as a civ read fwiw

[G-Man]

Hillary Points Update!


Night 3:
+1 to everyone who voted in the Night 3 poll
+1 to everyone who voted for a Clinton-esque choice for VP (Brown, Castro, McCauliffe, and Vilsack)
+2 to everyone for a death free night!

Also:

-DFaraday earned an extra Hillary Point Night 3 for asking a good question about the night poll.
-Quin lost a point in the Sockys thread


Day 4:

-Marmot earned a point for asking a good question
-Epi earned a point for playing the victim card

+1 Hillary Point to everyone who exercised their right to vote in the Day 4 poll



Updated Hillary Points Standings:

+16 Points: S~V~S
+15 Points: notsawyer540
+14 Points: thellama73
+13 Points: Marmot
+12 Points: Long Con
+11 Points: DFaraday, DrWilgy
+10.5 Points: Epignosis
+10 Points: Jackofhearts2005, MacDougall
+9 Points: FZ., TheFloyd73
+8 Points: Scotty
+7 Points: Elohcin
+4 Points: Quin

Also, two Day 4 polls have been added to the Polls section. One is the top-of-page poll and the other shows the weighted vote tallies.

[Epignosis]

So forgive me if I don't put any stock in your so-called "cases."

You're forgiven. I hope you'll extend me the same courtesy and forgive me for not putting much stock in your reads, given that they have cost us SVS and Quin.

And got the serial killer Day 1.

Quin wasn't a "read." Quin was a preferred option over notsawyer, whom I have reasons to view as a civilian. The reasons I had for Quin were less convincing.

[thellama73]

So forgive me if I don't put any stock in your so-called "cases."

You're forgiven. I hope you'll extend me the same courtesy and forgive me for not putting much stock in your reads, given that they have cost us SVS and Quin.

And got the serial killer Day 1.

Quin wasn't a "read." Quin was a preferred option over notsawyer, whom I have reasons to view as a civilian. The reasons I had for Quin were less convincing.

That's fair. I'm still going to vote for Sawyer tomorrow. And I still consider you a friend.

[notsawyer540]

That's fair. I'm still going to vote for Sawyer tomorrow. And I still consider you a friend.

I found you more suspicious than Quin yesterday, but I was forced to vote in the interest of self-preservation. Should I survive the night, you'll likely be getting my vote tomorrow.

[Epignosis]

So forgive me if I don't put any stock in your so-called "cases."

You're forgiven. I hope you'll extend me the same courtesy and forgive me for not putting much stock in your reads, given that they have cost us SVS and Quin.

And got the serial killer Day 1.

Quin wasn't a "read." Quin was a preferred option over notsawyer, whom I have reasons to view as a civilian. The reasons I had for Quin were less convincing.

That's fair. I'm still going to vote for Sawyer tomorrow. And I still consider you a friend.

Did you ever factor the below into your suspicion?

Spoiler: show

I want to know the following from everybody:

1. Where you stand on notsawyer and why.
I'm leaning bad on Notsawyer because he is tunneling Epi, forcing the facts to fit his suspicion (ie., blaming Epi alone for SVS's lynch), and cites Epi's lack of caught baddies despite the fact that Notsawyer is hardly looking at anyone but Epi, and so has also caught no baddies.

I want to know the following from everybody:

1. Where you stand on notsawyer and why.
I think Sawyer has looked bad from Day 1. His equivocating, his dismissiveness, and his case on you seems forced. He is getting my vote today.

1. Where you stand on notsawyer and why.
I'm kind of okay with notsawyer. Epignosis' suspicion of him has some influence on me, but overall I think this interaction is civ/civ. I think his accusations seem genuine enough, even if I don't agree with them.

I am of two minds on notsawyer. If he were a Syndicate regular, someone with whom I had experience interacting with, I might have a clearer opinion of him, because a stubborn insistence is a trait I am more likely to believe comes from a civilian. Consider: If he's mafia, then he knows I'm not bad, so what's his exit strategy should he prove successful? I call that short-term gain, long-term loss.

Moreover, notsawyer is taking three votes right from the get-go and his reaction to all this is to double down on his smear campaign:

I'm going to be out of the house until this evening. I'll catch back up and post my overall thoughts on everyone as soon as I get a chance.

One question I would like answered is: Have I really been forcing evidence to fit my conclusions, or has Epi's Fox-News-style misrepresentation of facts and events fooled too many of you?

In his first post since the Day began, he asks a loaded question and uses the phrase "misrepresentation of facts" without mentioning a single fact I misrepresented. And he asked me for evidence, and when I gave him plenty, he had nothing to say about it. That's not encouraging.

Still, if notsawyer is mafia, then he has accomplished nothing more than setting himself for the lynch today without even the consolation prize of getting me lynched first- and he doesn't seem fazed by that.

[Marmot]

I got Llama as a civ read fwiw

Spoiler: show

[DFaraday]

I have wanted to string llama up for the way he's been characterizing people and acting like Day 0 stuff is more important than Day 3 stuff.

Why does that make him bad though?

I agree that Mac's vote seemed shady, both as a potential save and as a WIFOM "why would a baddie do that?" scenario. I also still suspect MM, so I'm looking forward to LC's ISO.

Also, these phases end while I'm at work, so I can pretty much never be around for EoD. Just saying.

[Jackofhearts2005]

Such a great game, thematically. Loving all the stuff about Hillary points and vote redistribution. I was seriously like "This is such a great theme. I should run a version of it on the Realms" but realized I couldn't do it better.

More Hillary points for donating to Gman's reelection campaign, please.

[thellama73]

So forgive me if I don't put any stock in your so-called "cases."

You're forgiven. I hope you'll extend me the same courtesy and forgive me for not putting much stock in your reads, given that they have cost us SVS and Quin.

And got the serial killer Day 1.

Quin wasn't a "read." Quin was a preferred option over notsawyer, whom I have reasons to view as a civilian. The reasons I had for Quin were less convincing.

That's fair. I'm still going to vote for Sawyer tomorrow. And I still consider you a friend.

Did you ever factor the below into your suspicion?

Spoiler: show

I want to know the following from everybody:

1. Where you stand on notsawyer and why.
I'm leaning bad on Notsawyer because he is tunneling Epi, forcing the facts to fit his suspicion (ie., blaming Epi alone for SVS's lynch), and cites Epi's lack of caught baddies despite the fact that Notsawyer is hardly looking at anyone but Epi, and so has also caught no baddies.

I want to know the following from everybody:

1. Where you stand on notsawyer and why.
I think Sawyer has looked bad from Day 1. His equivocating, his dismissiveness, and his case on you seems forced. He is getting my vote today.

1. Where you stand on notsawyer and why.
I'm kind of okay with notsawyer. Epignosis' suspicion of him has some influence on me, but overall I think this interaction is civ/civ. I think his accusations seem genuine enough, even if I don't agree with them.

I am of two minds on notsawyer. If he were a Syndicate regular, someone with whom I had experience interacting with, I might have a clearer opinion of him, because a stubborn insistence is a trait I am more likely to believe comes from a civilian. Consider: If he's mafia, then he knows I'm not bad, so what's his exit strategy should he prove successful? I call that short-term gain, long-term loss.

Moreover, notsawyer is taking three votes right from the get-go and his reaction to all this is to double down on his smear campaign:

I'm going to be out of the house until this evening. I'll catch back up and post my overall thoughts on everyone as soon as I get a chance.

One question I would like answered is: Have I really been forcing evidence to fit my conclusions, or has Epi's Fox-News-style misrepresentation of facts and events fooled too many of you?

In his first post since the Day began, he asks a loaded question and uses the phrase "misrepresentation of facts" without mentioning a single fact I misrepresented. And he asked me for evidence, and when I gave him plenty, he had nothing to say about it. That's not encouraging.

Still, if notsawyer is mafia, then he has accomplished nothing more than setting himself for the lynch today without even the consolation prize of getting me lynched first- and he doesn't seem fazed by that.

Which part of it? That post contains four different opinions of Sawyer. What am I supposed to be looking for? The part where you argue that if Notsawyer is bad, he is not very good at it? Lots of baddies are not very good at it. It doesn't mean we shouldn't lynch them.